dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
68
share rss forum feed


IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast

Hopefully this will level the playing field

Hopefully Aereo will be forced to pay retransmission fees like everyone else. If people are getting the signal and not watching the commercials (with Aereo's DVR feature) then they are essentially stealing the programming and Aereo is profiting. So Aereo is basically committing piracy. With legitimate pay TV services and their DVRs (that devalue commercials), retransmission fees make up for the lost advertising revenue.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Maybe the broadcasters next step will be conditional access where you'll have to purchase a converter box (like during the DTV conversion) and you'll have to prove residency in the viewing area and get an access card from the TV station at no charge. And that will come with copy protection.

Or maybe they can engineer a solution to copy protect the broadcast signal so it will only go into a TV but any attempts to retransmit it will cause distortion and require equipment for authorized retransmission.

If the broadcasters had the RIAA on their backs, Aereo would be history. They have successfully shut down every attempt to distribute their content without compensation. Look at the LimeWire and Napster. Actors and producers don't work for free.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.

I have not and will not cut the cord.


wildthing202

join:2007-08-14
Douglas, MA

1 recommendation

People not watching the commercials are stealing? I take it your the kind of person that never changes the channel when the commercials come on. I doubt many people just leave the TV on one channel for the entire program's length. Even OTA people do have the option of changing the channel when the commercials come on so there's nothing there to lose since they won't be watching the commercial anyway.

RIAA meet Pirate Bay, Pirate Bay meet RIAA. I can get just about any song off of Pirate Bay or other sites like it.

Aereo will win since all they're doing is basically renting out a sling box to someone in a local market.



anon troll

@bellsouth.net
reply to IowaCowboy

Not just the RIAA, but the MPAA, ESA, and the Copyright Alliance as well. For the ESA, the mini antenna could be patent infringement. Aereo will not be the only ones to lose but other online video services Youtube, Dailymotion, Ustream, Justin.Tv., etc.


wkm001

join:2009-12-14
reply to IowaCowboy

I'm building and selling on OTA DVR. Which lets you have your cake and eat it too. »thepcdeals.com

What good is cake if you can't eat it?



endgame

@comcast.net
reply to wildthing202

Stealing is a harsh word... On the simplistic side one may see Aereo as a hero for making TV watching really really cheap (given they don't have all the costs). Comparing it to OTA is about right today, but if this really took off in a big way you need to compare it closer to cable/sat and what happens to all the funding models.

The reality is content needs to have a funding source to be good. If you remove all the funding sources it will drastically change.... and perhaps not for the better.

Short term this sounds good... but be careful what you wish for....


Chubbysumo

join:2009-12-01
Superior, WI
Reviews:
·Charter

3 recommendations

reply to IowaCowboy

Okay, so, i will bite on this, and debunk every part of it.

said by IowaCowboy:

If people are getting the signal and not watching the commercials (with Aereo's DVR feature) then they are essentially stealing the programming and Aereo is profiting.

no, since even if I watch it on a TV without a DVR, I can and usually do walk away during the commercials, and mute them(because they are still fucking loud, even with the congress passed LOUDact). I know many people who do this, so, its not like we were going to sit and watch the commercials anyways. This goes all the way back to the Sony V VCR debate. Timeshifting is legal, and was ruled so, and commercials started becoming devalued right then, and have been steadily going down in value ever since. No one wants to see the commercials, and obviously, most of the content that these companies are producing now is not worth the watch, as demonstrated by declining viewership. Is it still stealing the content if I walk away and mute a commercial, because thats the same idea that a DVR does. Am I stealing content by not pinning my eyes open and being a sheepsumer?

said by IowaCowboy:

So Aereo is basically committing piracy. With legitimate pay TV services and their DVRs (that devalue commercials), retransmission fees make up for the lost advertising revenue.

no, retrans fees do not even begin to make up how much is lost in advertising, since people can walk away from the commercials anyways, so no matter the method watched, commercials can be skipped or ignored one way or another. Retrans fees are a scam and a sham, and always have been, and guess what, those national ads are still in there on the retransmission, still catching viewers, and still making money. Retrans fees are a way for broadcaster to double dip money from viewers, and nothing more.

said by IowaCowboy:

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

I have a cake right here, and im eating it.

said by IowaCowboy:

Maybe the broadcasters next step will be conditional access where you'll have to purchase a converter box (like during the DTV conversion) and you'll have to prove residency in the viewing area and get an access card from the TV station at no charge. And that will come with copy protection.

Or maybe they can engineer a solution to copy protect the broadcast signal so it will only go into a TV but any attempts to retransmit it will cause distortion and require equipment for authorized retransmission.

so, you want more senseless DRM? I bet they would find a way to force you to watch the commercials too, which would drive even more people to piracy. It has been proven over and over again that DRM that treats legit users as thieves drives people to find an alternative that works. If someone turned on their TV, and their service was distorted, they would call the FCC and bitch, or just find and download the content online. DRM does not work, and I don't know how many times the MPAA and RIAA can prove this. Apple got rid of their DRM because it was useless, and kept more people from playing their music that actually paid for it.

said by IowaCowboy:

If the broadcasters had the RIAA on their backs, Aereo would be history. They have successfully shut down every attempt to distribute their content without compensation. Look at the LimeWire and Napster. Actors and producers don't work for free.

Limewire and napster, the two cases that the **AA had success in, and you have to trot them out on a silver platter. Did Napster dying stop people sharing music? Did limewire dying stop people from finding movies? Do you really think that two cases like this did anything except bring attention to the glaringly obvious problem? the problem is that these companies are not giving consumers what they want, at a reasonable price, which means people will find it in a format they want, at a price they want. Innovation and "new" ideas usually happen on someone elses success and/or failure. Napster treaded on some toes, but it showed that the model could work, and now we have apple itunes, which gave consumers what they wanted(single song access, reasonable price, quick access, on demand downloading, and playback on many devices). Limewire stepped on a few toes too, and while it was used for many, many illegal things, if you consider the movies that were available, look what we have now: VUDU, Amazon, netflix, ect. We now have a host of providers that allow us to instantly access thousands of movies without ever leaving our living rooms. We no longer have to steal and download a lot of stuff because there is now a legitimate and reasonably priced option. Netflix has been the single biggest piracy killer in the last 10 years, more so than any MPAA or RIAA case. Give people what they want, at a reasonable price, and they will pay for it, and use it.

As a Side note, the MPAA and RIAA have continiously tried to screw both actors, producers, writers, singers, ect. out of money too, not just cowsumers.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
These businesses have been crooked for years, and have been using creative account methods and sly contract language to ensure that they pay nothing after the fact, and everything is a loss. Did you know that the 2002 film "spider-man" pulled in over 800 million in gross at the box office, and the movies production cost was only 140 million, yet, Stan Lee had to sue to get any of their profits because according to columbia pictures, the movie lost money. These companies are crooked to their very core, and continue to report record profits, even with piracy continuing to remain flat.

Broadcaster lose nothing because of aero, since those people would have either not watched(because no signal), or they would have watched OTA for free. You cannot assume that every pair of eyes is a person who would pay in some way.


ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4
reply to IowaCowboy

So when you record a show be it on your VCR in the past or with a DVR now, you ALWAYS watch the commercials? I call BS on that one.

Notice how the two acronyms are almost identical? Only thing that has changed is the media from analog to digital. That's it.


sandman_1

join:2011-04-23
11111
reply to IowaCowboy

said by IowaCowboy:

If people are getting the signal and not watching the commercials (with Aereo's DVR feature) then they are essentially stealing the programming and Aereo is profiting.

Ohh brother , guess you never heard of OTA dvrs? Geez really man, I find it hard to believe you really think not watching commercials is stealing. The last time I checked it was a choice.

said by IowaCowboy:

So Aereo is basically committing piracy.

How is using an antenna committing piracy? I guess you think I am a pirate because I receive OTA broadcasts over my antenna. How absurd...

said by IowaCowboy:

Or maybe they can engineer a solution to copy protect the broadcast signal so it will only go into a TV but any attempts to retransmit it will cause distortion and require equipment for authorized retransmission.

If the broadcasters had the RIAA on their backs, Aereo would be history. They have successfully shut down every attempt to distribute their content without compensation. Look at the LimeWire and Napster. Actors and producers don't work for free.

We are talking about OTA stations here man. This isn't cable. These stations are already compensated. The problem is that they have relied on the cable gravy train for another means of compensation, which they shouldn't be getting in the first place. They transmit signals out in the open for anyone to pickup. Why should cable and satellite companies have to pay extra just to receive that signal. It is all BS to begin with and Aereo is in essence pointing that fact out. I hope Aereo wins because this crap is getting out of hand anyway with these retrans disputes.


IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast
reply to IowaCowboy

The only thing I watch on my favorite local station (WWLP) is the local newscasts and Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy and if that station has it's funding cut off (retransmission and advertising), you can kiss that station goodbye. They aren't going to stay in business if they don't make a profit. All of their NBC programming has gone downhill and isn't worth watching thanks to declining revenue.

And Aereo's business model is trying to take these stations off of life support. I always like to sit down at mealtime and watch the local news on my kitchen TV, which may not last much longer if there is no money to pay the news anchors.

That is why I'm siding with the broadcasters.

The Supreme Court is the last hope for the local tv stations because the cable/satellite providers may follow Aereo and cut off their funding. It's not the networks but the local stations that I care about.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.

I have not and will not cut the cord.


Chuck_IV

join:2003-11-18
Connecticut

said by IowaCowboy:

All of their NBC programming has gone downhill and isn't worth watching thanks to declining revenue.

Thanks to the declining revenue? Thanks for the LOL moment.

Their revenues have SKYROCKETED over the past 30 years or so because of not only the ad revenue they always received(nevermind the additional ad revenue due to shortening programs from 50 to about 42 minutes) but also the double dipping of HUGE retransmission fees.

Come on.

TheGhost
Premium
join:2003-01-03
Lake Forest, IL
reply to wildthing202

Heaven forbid if someone even goes to the bathroom during that time...


itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA
reply to IowaCowboy

quote:
The Supreme Court is the last hope for the local tv stations because the cable/satellite providers may follow Aereo and cut off their funding. It's not the networks but the local stations that I care about
Interesting. I could give 2 $hits about the local stations. I'd rather have a national NBC/CBS/ABC/Fox than the local stuff. Heck, for many years when we had DirecTV we "moved" to the NY area so we could get NBC/CBS/ABC/Fox content. Didn't miss the local BS one bit.


wizardry

@ohio-state.edu
reply to IowaCowboy

Courts are triers of fact, not chambers of commerce. That means they are here to apply the law to cases, not to maximize revenue for extant businesses. If you have a problem with copyright law or television production and distribution business models, make your customer preferences known to the market and your opinions to the legislatures.

Expand your moderator at work

Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
reply to IowaCowboy

Re: Hopefully this will level the playing field

How is using the Aereo DVR feature any different than using an ATSC tuner and a Tivo or a PC? Is that stealing too? because its the same damn thing.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports



IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1

Don't you have to pay for TiVo though.